Article

Focus Movement and the Nature of Uninterpretable Features

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.

... A seção 3 traz uma discussão sobre movimento-Wh e o problema dos traços, na qual se avaliam questões como para onde e por que Whs se movem em perguntas. Na seção 4, avalio a questão do movimento para posições focais, assumindo a hipótese de Karimi (2003), segundo a qual movimento para Foco é ativado por checagem de um traço [-interpretável]. Ainda nessa seção, discuto o problema da atribuição de Caso aos Whs sujeitos de infinitivas e delineio a proposta final deste trabalho. ...
... 3.4 O que de fato está relacionado ao movimento para posições focais? Karimi (2003), em análise de dados do persa, afirma haver evidência suficiente para se considerar que movimento para posições focais seja ativado numa operação de valoração de um traço específico. Segundo a autora, essa língua exibe dois tipos de foco: um que aparece dentro do VP e que denota informação nova e outro que requer uma entonação (stress) bem acentuada e que expressa interpretação contrastiva. ...
... Argumento -em seção posterior -que em português Whs se movem abertamente para Foc após uma operação de valoração de um traço de foco. 26 Pode parecer que uma proposta como a de Karimi (2003) mostre algum tipo de incompatibilidade com a proposta cartográfica quando a autora, citando Emonds (1976), menciona a existência de múltiplos especificadores. De fato, na teoria cartográfica de Rizzi (1997) e Beletti (2004) não se postula tal questão dadas as suas especificidades. ...
Article
Full-text available
Resumo: Este trabalho põe em discussão a derivação de sentenças infinitivas que complementam verbos como ‘ver’ e ‘ouvir’ e que apresentam um sujeito-Wh. Como se vê na empiria, apenas as sentenças com um ‘stress’ focal no sintagma-Wh sujeito constituem uma derivação convergente. Argumenta-se que o que aparentemente se configura numa construção com Wh in situ é na verdade uma construção com movimento curto do Wh para o Spec-FocP na projeção focal interna da sentença matriz (assumindo a ideia de BELLETTI, 2004), e que, em português, o traço-Wh de sintagmas-Wh é valorado sincreticamente com o traço de foco em projeções focais, como propõe Kato (2004). Essa proposta ainda prevê que sentenças infinitivas são defectivas também quanto à projeção de uma periferia interna, fato que explica certa assimetria verificada nos dados. Palavras-chave: sujeitos-Wh; infinitivas; traços de foco. Abstract: This paper concerns the derivation of non-finite sentences that complement verbs of the type of ‘see’ and ‘hear’ and contain a Whsubject. Analyzed data evidence that sentences that carry a Wh-phrase with a stressed Wh-subject are convergent, contrary to sentences that do not. We argue that the apparent Wh in situ construction is in fact a sentence where some instance of Wh-movement takes place. The idea is that the Wh-phrase is moved to the Spec-FocP in the low IP area (in the terms of BELLETTI, 2004) and that in Portuguese the Wh feature of Whphrases is checked with a Focus feature in focus projections, according to Kato (2004). This proposal still states that sentences of an infinitival nature are defective also in terms of projecting an internal periphery, what seems to explain certain asymmetry facts observed in data. Keywords: Wh-subjects; non-finite clauses; focus features.
... I will not investigate the reasons behind this movement further here, but see e.g. Miyagawa (1997) on the lack of optionality in the, at first glance, seemingly free word order in Japanese and Westergaard (2011) for an account of the subject's position sensitive to Focus and Karimi (2003aKarimi ( , 2005 for an account on Focusdriven movement in Persian. ...
... Examples like (13d) are grammatical if the DO carries focus intonation, which is discussed in section 5.1. See alsoKarimi (2003aKarimi ( ,b, 2005 for a comparable observation in Persian. ...
Thesis
Full-text available
This licentiate thesis investigates the case and the syntactic position of the direct object in South Saami. The focus is on plural direct objects, which have Differential Object Marking, a phenomenon in which the case alternates between different types of direct objects. In South Saami, some direct objects carry the accusative case form in the plural, while others only carry the plural marker. This variation of suffix displayed on the direct object is contingent on definiteness; definite direct objects consistently display the accusative case form in the plural while indefinite direct objects, specific and nonspecific alike, lack accusative morphology. In addition to case marking, the study presents an analysis of the alternation of the syntactic position of some direct objects. Definite and indefinite specific direct objects can be realized in two positions: as the complement of the verb or in a position as specifier of the light verb projection. By contrast, indefinite nonspecific direct objects obligatorily surface in the complement position of the verb. This variability in syntactic position of some direct objects is analyzed by means of a Specificity Operator, adjoined to the DP-level of every specific NP, definite and indefinite. The operator moves as an instance of quantifier raising in order to take scope over Existential Closure (EC). EC binds NPs in its domain and give them an existential reading. Therefore, when the Specificity Operator raises, it anchors the DP it is adjoined to in a domain, which is unbound by EC and therefore facilitates a specific interpretation. The operator, void of phonological content, can raise alone to the specifier of vP as an instance of covert movement. The operator can also Pied-pipe the DP it is adjoined to, which results in overt movement of the DP. Indefinite nonspecific direct objects lack the Specificity Operator and therefore they remain in-situ in the VP, where they are bound by EC. In addition to its theoretical value, the thesis will be of use for teachers, students and others with an interest in a better understanding of the case form and the position of the direct object in South Saami.
... The example in (19), on the other hand, illustrates that this order is reversed when the object is non-specific. Let us assume then, following Karimi (2003a;b;), that the specific object is outside the VP and moves into the [Spec, vP] whereas its non-specific variant remains within the VP. Under this assumption, the only structural position for the manner adverbials in (18) and (19) would be within the VP. ...
... This effect brought about by scrambling is illustrated in (20b). For the sake of argument, we adopt the analysis proposed by Karimi (1999;2003a;b;, according to which scrambling in Persian is driven by topic or focus, and assume that the scrambling of the PP in (20b) targets [Spec, FocP] above the TP; the surface subject is then located in [Spec, TopP]. Bearing this observation in mind, let us now consider the example of an empty object construction shown in (21b). ...
Article
Full-text available
We investigate the distribution of argument ellipsis in Persian in the context of the recent debate concerning the derivation of null arguments. Using sloppy/quantificational interpretations of elided arguments, we show that Persian exhibits subject-object elliptical asymmetries. We develop various arguments against the Verb-Stranding VP-ellipsis analysis of the subject-object asymmetry. We argue instead that the asymmetry in question is captured by the anti-agreement theory (Saito 2007). Our analysis predicts that the logical subject in Persian should be able to permit argument ellipsis when it is not in the position associated with φ-feature agreement. We show that this prediction is indeed borne out in several syntactic constructions whose inanimate plural subjects do not enter into an agreement relation with any functional head such as T. We also briefly explore one significant consequence of our analysis for the proper treatment of the so-called differential object marker –'râ 'and conclude that this marker is the default morphological case in the technical sense of Marantz (1991).
... According to the various proposals pertaining to the issue of wh Movement in Persian, it is proposed that Persian is a wh in situ language in the way that the wh-words stay in their original positions. Concerning the basic word order, Persian is an SOV language, with fairly free word order, which does not exhibit obligatory single wh Movement comparable to English (Karimi, 2003). Because of the presence of wh-particle in Persian, the Q feature is checked via the wh-particle, and there would be no requirements for the wh-words to rise into the Spec of CP for the checking purposes. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study attempts to tease apart the effect of dominant languages of communication on the acquisition of syntactic properties of L3 French in order to test the current L3 generative theories. Three groups of bilinguals took part in this study: L1 Persian/L2 English, with French as the dominant language of communication, L1 Persian/L2 English, with Persian as the dominant language of communication and L1 English/L2 Persian, with Persian as the dominant language of communication. English and French pattern similarly in the wh-question structures. That is to say, wh-question word moves pre-subject position while in Persian it remains in situ. The results rejected the effect of the four proposals (e.g. the L1 factor; the L2 Status Factor; the Cumulative Enhancement Model [CEM]; the Typological Proximity Model [TPM]), but the role of dominant language) in the acquisition of the third language was confirmed by grammaticality judgment and element rearrangement task. The implication of this study suggests that the initial path of L3 acquisition is not determined by wholesale transfer or mixed transfer theories but rather by the learners’ dominant language of communication.
... According to the various proposals pertaining to the issue of wh-movement in Persian, it is proposed that Persian is a wh-in situ language in the way that the wh-words stay in their original positions. Concerning the basic word order, Persian is an SOV language, with fairly free word order, which does not exhibit obligatory single wh-movement comparable to English (Karimi, 2003). Due to the presence of wh-particle in Persian, the Q feature is checked via the wh-particle and there would be no requirements for the wh-words to rise into the Spec of CP for the checking purposes. ...
Article
Full-text available
Recent decade has been prominent in investigating third language acquisition (L3). This study presents an Optimality theoretic account of French wh-question by learners whose first and second language are Persian and English respectively. Additionally, it investigates transfer at the initial stage based on the three dominant transfer hypotheses namely, L1 transfer hypothesis, L2 status factor, Cumulative Enhancement Model (CEM) in the domain of L3 acquisition. First, in French and Persian wh- question structure, the wh-word move to pre subject position (Spec-CP & Spec-FOCP) but the interrogative verb do not raise to C. This is the indicator of L1 Factor hypothesis. Second, in French and English the wh-word follows by an interrogative verb in French or by subject-auxiliary inversion in English so in these languages the wh-word occupies the Spec-CP and the verb occupies the C position. This is an evidence for L2 status factor. Third, in English and Persian the wh-word remains in original position for echo questions, this feature triggers this parallel structure in French; this confirms Cumulative Enhancement Model hypothesis. Two groups of Persian native speakers with different English proficiency levels (the lower-intermediate & advanced) that were at the initial stage of acquiring L3 French were asked to complete two test namely, grammar judgment task and translation test. The results showed that the main source of transfer was L1 transfer hypothesis and partially CEM. Regarding OT, although the advanced learners transferred their L2 knowledge in the L3 acquisition in GJT, there was not any significant difference between L1 transfer and L2 transfer context. Therefore, the following constraint hierarchies were obtained for TT and GJT respectively, Q-Scope>> Lex-V>Stay>>Q-Mark and Stay>>Lex-V>>Q-Mark>>Q-Scope. In fact, these ranking, particularly the former one, advocated the L1 transfer hypothesis.
Article
Full-text available
The present study investigates how focus is phonetically realized in declarative and interrogative sentences in Persian. Focus is usually interpreted as contrastive focus in this language. That is, the contrasted element is chosen out of a closed set of entities and bears heavy stress. In this study, 12 native speakers of Persian recorded short declarative and interrogative sentences including Clitic Group and Phonological Word in neutral and focal conditions. The results show small acoustic differences in duration, intensity and spectral information between initial and final accented target words in neutral and focus conditions in Persian, by the side of substantial differences in f 0 .
Article
Full-text available
This paper analyzes verb-preposing in yes-no questions in Persian within the Minimalist framework (Chomsky, 1995, 2000a-b). Raghibdoust (1993), in line with Karimi (1989), considers these constructions as the result of the extraction of the subject to the post-verbal position. As opposed to Raghibdoust (1993), therefore, in this paper, we employ some pieces of evidence including the impetus for the movement of constituents in grammar, the distinguished nature of the fronted verb compared to other fronted elements in structures with multiple fronted constituents, and the impossibility of fronting the light verb alone in compound verbs, hence leaving the nonverbal element in situ, to show that verb-preposing in yes-no structures in Persian is to be analyzed as the result of fronting of the verb rather than the extraposition of the subject. Following that, evidence is provided against Karimi’s (1994) idea that the head of CP should be taken as the position for the moved verb. Instead, using some evidence, we argue that the head of the FocusP obtains a better landing site for the preposed verbal element. If this analysis is on the right track, we then propose that the [-Q] feature on the head of the CP as the Probe is matched through the Agree mechanism with the [+Q] feature on the preposed verb as the Goal to get checked and valued, hence satisfying the yes-no question interpretation.
Article
Full-text available
The present paper examines a phenomenon by means of which the main verb in yes-no questions in the spoken form of Persian can either optionally move to the front of the sentence or remain in-situ, intending to yield an interrogative interpretation. However, as the latest approaches to the study of the linguistic systems do not opt for optionality, the issue of the optionality of verb movement in such structures, which seems to be an unfortunate drawback, should be settled down in some way or another. More specifically, considering the theoretical framework of the paper, which is the feature checking mechanism within the Minimalist Program (Chomsky, 1981; 1982; 1993; 1995; 2000; 2001a-b), the optionality of verb-preposing in yes-no questions entails a contradiction in terms of the two-valued feature strength in the feature checking theory. A feature should be either [+ value] or [-value], and there is no in-between feature value. That is, a syntactic feature is either strong or weak, making the constituent it is associated with either move or remain in situ. Consequently, the optional movement of an element in syntax cannot be analyzed as having a strong and a weak feature simultaneously
Article
Wh-in-situ languages have a special role to play in investigating the relation between the wh-syntax of a language and the availability of sluicing-like constructions (SLCs). Van Craenenbroeck and Lipták (2013) propose that whether a language exhibits genuine sluicing should be predictable from the syntax of the language’s wh-questions in nonelliptical contexts. We refine this formulation by considering SLCs in two contrasting wh-in-situ languages, Hindi-Urdu and Uzbek. Hindi-Urdu wh-movement occurs in the narrow syntax, but is obscured by PF processes; in Uzbek, no narrow syntax dependency is involved. Correspondingly, only Hindi-Urdu SLCs involve genuine sluicing; Uzbek SLCs are derived from reduced copular clauses. Thus, narrow syntax wh-movement may be obscured by lower-copy pronunciation in nonelliptical environments; the head of the wh-chain is then pronounced in combination with ellipsis, but not otherwise. Here, we demonstrate that the availability of genuine sluicing in Hindi-Urdu and Uzbek corresponds directly to the specific properties of their whsystems, but not necessarily to the surface position of wh-material in a typical constituent question.
Article
Sluicing—the elliptical construction in which all of a constituent question goes missing except for the interrogative phrase—is commonly analyzed as involving movement of the interrogative phrase to Spec-CP followed by deletion of TP (Ross 1969, Merchant 2001). In this paper, I examine how well the movement plus deletion analysis extends to Farsi, a wh-in situ language that, surprisingly, has a sluicing construction nearly identical to its English counterpart. I argue that the interrogative phrase in Farsi sluicing escapes deletion not by wh-movement as in English but by a type of focus movement. This operation, which normally applies very generally and is optional, is restricted in sluicing contexts in two ways: i) it is obligatory, and ii) it only applies to interrogative phrases. I propose a formal implementation that integrates these two properties into the licensing requirement on deletion, advancing the current understanding of the syntax of sluicing.
Article
Full-text available
This article argues that identificational focus, which expresses exhaustive identification and occupies the specifier of a functional projection, must be distinguished in language description from information focus, which conveys new information and involves no syntactic reordering. The properties of the two types of focus are established on the basis of Hungarian and English material. It is argued that the cleft constituent is the realization of identificational focus in English. Only-phrases are analyzed as identificational foci carrying an evaluative presupposition. The feature specification of identificational focus is shown to be subject to parametric variation: the focus operators of various languages are specified for the positive value of either or both of the features [+exhaustive] and [+contrastive].*.